Geoff Air writes:
Those who 'regularly' use system.fgfsrc, like I do,
to control each run of FG, and use 'panel-less'
aircraft, like ufo, have probably been 'adding' this
patch to fg_init for 'years' ;=))
Oooh it is not just me then who doesn't just 'use'
all the eye candy :-)
Cheers
Quoting Geoff Air:
It certainly paves the way for fgrun to simply write the
system.fgfsrc, and run the binary with a minimum of command
line parameters ... and leaves a persistent file 'trace'
of what fgrun 'requested' of FG ... more info benefit ...
Because some argued, and I mostly agree,
Frederic Bouvier wrote:
Quoting Geoff Air:
It certainly paves the way for fgrun to simply write the
system.fgfsrc, and run the binary with a minimum of command
line parameters ... and leaves a persistent file 'trace'
of what fgrun 'requested' of FG ... more info benefit ...
Because some
Martin Spott wrote:
Frederic Bouvier wrote:
Quoting Geoff Air:
It certainly paves the way for fgrun to simply write the
system.fgfsrc, and run the binary with a minimum of command
line parameters ... and leaves a persistent file 'trace'
of what fgrun 'requested' of FG ... more info
Frederic Bouvier wrote:
But... The fact that Geoff tells that the file is read twice ring a little
bell
in my mind. I think the issue was raised sometimes ago and could have unwanted
side effects I can't recollect for the moment.
It makes sense - especially in the context of the claim, that
Quoting Martin Spott:
Frederic Bouvier wrote:
But... The fact that Geoff tells that the file is read twice ring a little
bell
in my mind. I think the issue was raised sometimes ago and could have
unwanted
side effects I can't recollect for the moment.
It makes sense - especially in
